Claude Account Bans, Suspensions and Appeals

The author jokes that Anthropic's upcoming IPO may curb its mass account bans, since each ban also cuts into shareholder returns.

Citing Anthropic's IPO filing that 5–7% of revenue comes from rule-violating customers, the author rails against being banned with no appeal and no refund of annual fees.

The poster speculates that thin margins on high-quota subscriptions lead Anthropic to ban China-region users right after purchase without refunds, raising per-user revenue.

A user asks how rakazo connects to Claude, suspecting it doesn't go through Claude Code and may breach Anthropic's ToS, risking account suspension.

A post citing Reuters says 5–7% of Anthropic's revenue in the first nine months came from paid accounts banned for terms violations, and jokes that refunds seem gone.

A post claims Anthropic's IPO filing shows 5–7% of first-nine-month revenue came from accounts later banned for violations, roughly RMB 6B in the first half.

The poster says Claude went from full refunds to banning accounts on day 29, then partial refunds, and now bans come with no refund from Claude or the app stores, blaming refund abuse.

The poster argues mainland users who avoid Claude won't be banned or lose money, and that mass illicit use plus refunds cost Anthropic fees, making bans the company's last resort.

A comment notes Anthropic's terms state banned accounts are not refunded, and App Store refunds are paid by Apple itself, so repeated refund claims would be exploited for arbitrage.

An image post says 5–7% of Anthropic's revenue in its filing comes from banned violating accounts, about $1.65–2.32B, joking that banned users helped fund the IPO.

A user planning to switch to Claude asks in a reply thread how to avoid getting banned, showing the ban wave is affecting new-user decisions.

The author calls Claude's bans a black box with no refunds, saying they survived earlier ban waves but lost one account in September and another in October.